Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

$1000.00 per household would net $105,480,101,000.00 per year

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 08:33 PM
Original message
$1000.00 per household would net $105,480,101,000.00 per year
Edited on Mon May-14-07 08:35 PM by SoCalDem
That ought to be enough to start up a national health care. Of course some of those households are already using "tax dollars" for their health care already (and probably at a much higher cost..VA, Medic-aid, Medicare,Government employees)
The money that's currently being spent there could be rolled into the plan, and it would be even beefier..

There's NO reason to trust your life to the whims of your employer.

the figures are from the 2K census, but should be proportional..

Bosses would be out from under the insurance hassle, and employees could finally start paying them real wages again, instead of health care "trade-offs" in lieu of raises.

And the entrepreneurial spirit would be unleashed.. There are many people who long to start their own businesses, but don't dare, since they may have insurance where they are currently working

It would no longer matter is you were married or not..and same-sex couples would both have insurance..

of course the definition of "household" would take some doing, since households vary in size, but using that $1k as a basis for M, D & 2K, that works out to $250 per person...so even if the cost was raised to $500 per person (regardless of age or sex) it would just "make the pie bigger".

Some things would have to happen first though:

People would have to have a biometric ID that proved they were citizens, and proved they were who the ID said they were

Doctors would have to be paid from the "fund"..

mal-practice insurance would have to be pro-rated and include every doctor/hospital under the same umbrella
( Once the for-profit element is gone, I have a feeling that care would improve anyway)

Same for hospitals & clinics

and the unemployed insurance & HMO hucksters could be "re-trained" for new careers:)..Walmart's always looking for new "associates".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
GreenPartyVoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 09:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. That deserves some thought, thanks!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 09:50 PM
Response to Original message
2. SoCalDem, you're in the zone.
Keep it coming.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Massacure Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 10:04 PM
Response to Original message
3. 100 billion wouldn't be enough. It would need to be closer to a trillion.
Most countries spend between 7-9% of their GDP on health care. The U.S. spends about 15%, but that is climbing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 10:16 PM
Response to Original message
4. you are right on all points
well the costs need to be fine tuned but other than that you are correct.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sanskritwarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 11:23 PM
Response to Original message
5. What if I don't want to give 1000 dollars
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. I don't like paying for war-toys, but my tax money pays for them
We are not the Libertarian States of America :)

In for a penny, in for a pound :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gatorboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Why wouldn't you want to?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sanskritwarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Why should I want to?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gatorboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-15-07 08:15 AM
Response to Reply #8
21. Avoiding the question, eh?
Edited on Tue May-15-07 08:15 AM by gatorboy
It's understandable. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tkmorris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-15-07 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. What if I don't want to pay for the Iraq Occupation? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sanskritwarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-15-07 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. Well if the 1000 dollar was part of my normal taxes
Edited on Tue May-15-07 12:21 AM by sanskritwarrior
I would not complain. If it was 1000.00 on top of my other taxes I would.

As for taxes for the war, you don't have to pay them, but I think the IRS might get a little upset.......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-15-07 01:15 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Do you have health insurance now?.. What's your share (if you do)
Assuming that your share is $50 a week and your employer pays $100 a week.. that comes out to $7800 a year ..that's money you are "charged with", but never see.. and on top of it all you must pay co-pays on top of it.

Your employer would be giving YOU the enitire $7800, and you would be "taxed" $1k... the other $6800 is YOURS..

and if you chose to quit that job and get another, you would not have to worry about getting on their plan..

now if you are young and foolish and do not have coverage now, let me remind you that a car accident or a sports accident, or even tripping over a sprinkler head could financially ruin you..forever..

(my son had a torn ACL from the sprinkler part, and had we not had insurance, we would have been stuck for the cost ..about $40k including surgery and rehab)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sanskritwarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-15-07 01:29 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. Military member
no healthcare payment
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-15-07 12:06 AM
Response to Original message
10. another good link to check out
Edited on Tue May-15-07 12:07 AM by SoCalDem
http://www.nchc.org/facts/coverage.shtml

Facts on Health Insurance Coverage

Introduction

Most Americans have health insurance through their employers. But, employment is no longer a guarantee of health insurance coverage.

As America continues to move from a manufacturing-based economy to a service economy, and employee working patterns continue to evolve, health insurance coverage has become less stable. The service sector offers less access to health insurance than its manufacturing counterparts. Further, an increasing reliance on part-time and contract workers who are not eligible for coverage means fewer workers have access to employer-sponsored health insurance.

Due to rising health insurance premiums, many small employers cannot afford to offer health benefits. Companies that do offer health insurance, often require employees to contribute a larger share toward their coverage. As a result, an increasing number of Americans have opted not to take advantage of job-based health insurance because they cannot afford it.

Who are the uninsured?

* Nearly 47 million Americans, or 16 percent of the population, were without health insurance in 2005, the latest government data available (1).
* The number of uninsured rose 1.3 million between 2004 and 2005 and has increased by almost 7 million people since 2000 (1).
* The large majority of the uninsured (80 percent) are native or naturalized citizens (2).
* The increase in the number of uninsured in 2005 was focused among working age adults. The percentage of working adults (18 to 64) who had no health coverage climbed from 18.5 percent in 2004 to 20.5 percent in 2005 -- an increase of over 800,000 uninsured workers (1). Nearly one (1) million full-time workers lost their health insurance in 2005.
* Nearly 82 million people – about one-third of the population below the age of 65 spent a portion of either 2002 or 2003 without health coverage (3).
* Over 8 in 10 uninsured people came from working families – almost 70 percent from families with one or more full-time workers and 11 percent from families with part-time workers (2).
* The percentage of people (workers and dependents) with employment-based health insurance has dropped from 70 percent in 1987 to 59.5 percent in 2005. This is the lowest level of employment-based insurance coverage in more than a decade (4, 5).
* In 2005, nearly 15 percent of employees had no employer-sponsored health coverage available to them, either through their own job or through a family member (6).
* In 2005, 27.4 million workers were uninsured because not all businesses offer health benefits, not all workers qualify for coverage and many employees cannot afford their share of the health insurance premium even when coverage is at their fingertips (1).
* The number of uninsured children in 2005 was 8.3 million – or 11.2 percent of all children in the U.S. (1). The number of children who are uninsured increased by nearly 400,000 in 2005, breaking a trend of steady declines over the last five years.
* Young adults (18-to-24 years old) remained the least likely of any age group to have health insurance in 2005 – 30.6 percent of this group did not have health insurance (1).
* Based on a three year average (2003-2005), people of Hispanic origin were the least likely to have health insurance. An average of 32.6 percent of Hispanics were without health insurance during that period (1).
* Nearly 40 percent of the uninsured population reside in households that earn $50,000 or more (1). A growing number of middle-income families cannot afford health insurance payments even when coverage is offered by their employers.

etc...snip.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sanctified Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-15-07 02:21 AM
Response to Original message
14. I and my family currently do not have healthcare...
And there is no way I could afford another $1,000 a year, I am currently just barely making my rent and have bill collectors on me like there is no tomorrow. Also that $1,000 per family would never cover the cost for everyone, I don't know if you have ever looked into an insurance plan but here in Oregon the cost for a family of 4 with the bare minimum coverage is almost $800 a month.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-15-07 06:32 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. Milton, Welcome to DU.. and
Edited on Tue May-15-07 06:33 AM by SoCalDem
you would not "pay" it through insurance. This plan would ELIMINATE he whole insurance scheme. insurance is what's caused the problem for the minimally or non-insured people.

A true national health care plan PAYS the hospitals and doctors directly, BYPASSING any middle-men..and with EVERYONE under the same umbrella, the risk is spread over a large base so that the few who use a lot NOW, are mitigated by the MANY who may not go to the doctor much at all.

When insurers started peeling off certain groups, so they could rake in more profits, it grouped the high risk into one shallow pool, and of course the costs skyrocketed.. The lack of decent care caused this group to end up being sicker and actually made everyone else have to foot the bill indirectly anyway, through medicaid..

If a national plan were ever to happen, there would definitely be ways to help families such as yours, and to protect people who are unemployed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-15-07 07:08 AM
Response to Original message
16. We're already paying for it,
we're just not getting it. We subsidize the hospital industry to pay for those that don't have insurance. Those that do have insurance pay out the teeth for it. So we're in effect paying for it multiple times and more per capita than countries that offer healthcare. It's all about channeling the money through different private entities. It's also about maximizing profits for all healthcare entities and their stockholders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-15-07 07:21 AM
Response to Original message
17. Enough Of Beancounters Play God
Excellent post! Sadly, this system makes too much sense and the Insurance companies will fight to the death, literally, to keep their profit margins and iron grip on the American healthcare system.

In his last years, I assisted my father with his medical practice and had plenty...too much contact...with Insurance companies...constantly justifying the types of treatment for patients. The beancounters decided what's "proper care" sight unseen and has led some doctors to avoid treating certain patients based on what insurance they have or the fear of getting "blacklisted" from an HMO or PPO or other programs.

For many years I was at the mercy of employee health plans...and saw my premiums go up while the coverage went down. A national plan is long overdue...just so that doctors can do the diagnostics, not some actuary thousands of miles away.

Cheers...

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-15-07 07:25 AM
Response to Original message
18. I'm pretty certain 100 billion won't be enough.
The healthcare costs (not insurance, but the actual cost) of my family costs far more than 1000 per year and we have one person in our family who has a chronic disease (diabetes).

Even if we were all healthy, the healthcare costs of our family would be more inline with 4 to 5 thousand per year.

You are going to need 1000 for every health person per year plus probably 12000 for every person who has some chronic disease to cover the costs. The numbers would be in the trillions of dollars using the current costs of medical care.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-15-07 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. The spread would work though because EVERYONE is under the same umbrella
People do not go to the doctors because they like to..They go when they are sick.. The vast numbers of people who do NOT go all the time are in the same pool with the people who do need to go. That's how groups work..or should work. and used to work..

For many years NO ONE in my family ever needed care, yet we paid for insurance all those years too.. where did "our money" go? It went to help pay for the people who WERE sick and needed more care..

The irony is that we spent all those years with NO DRUGS NEEDED @ at a $0.00 per prescription cost... and now that my husband is diabetic, we have $75,00 co-pays for some of his meds :grr:..

whatchagonnado :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wcross Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-15-07 07:40 AM
Response to Original message
19. Right now my share of health insurance is equal to medicaid.
I would be willing to pay 1000.00 a year more along with what I already pay (Health insurance premium&Medicaid) if it meant every American would have health care.
I would limit it to U.S. citizens only and I would want to see some type of "co-pay" to discourage unnecessary use of the system. I personally know two or three hyperchondriacs that seem to go to the doctor on a monthly basis for a perceived "problem".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ileus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-15-07 08:29 AM
Response to Original message
22. They already get an average of 56% of my earnings...
I think it's time they make due with what they have. Rob some from the military budget there's more than enough there to pay for UHC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-15-07 09:11 AM
Response to Reply #22
23. Then that $1K would be a bargain for you, instead of what you're paying now
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 04:13 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC